Discuss the alleged Nazi genocide or other wartime atrocities without fear of censorship. No bullying of fellow posters is allowed at RODOH. If you can't be civil, please address the argument and not the participants. Do not use disparaging alterations of the user-names of other RODOH posters or their family members. Failure to heed warnings from Moderators will result in a 24 hour ban (or longer if necessary).

Duke Umeroffen wrote:Please provide evidence that my analysis is wrong and I will assuredly withdraw it.

Duke Umeroffen wrote:If you can provide a little more than that Mr. Smith I will withdraw my remark about Neo Nazis upsetting the Hess family.

Duke, the evidence you requested previously regarding the Hess family and their involuntary role in the desecration of the grave of the Deputy Führer has been supplied in full. Please be so good as to formally withdraw your earlier remarks. Thank you.

Kitty Hart-Moxon (1998): "Believe me, I came into Auschwitz in a much worse condition than I actually left it."

I think that I was half right in that case. Certain of the relatives agreed, certain others didn't.Edit The deciding vote was with the council, who don't want that sort of thing in their neighbourhood. Including pitched battles between two opposing ideologies. 17th August attracted an away support too.

To your knowledge were any of Hess's relatives actually in the habit of turning up and waving banners and shouting slogans? None of my heroes are on that particular council.

The civil authority leasing the grave had the determining vote. Given the fuss that the presence of the remains of Rudolf Hess was creating, someone took a decision.

As you seem to want to know these matters, has the removal of the Hess grave led in your opinion to less trouble?

There appears to be some unwillingness to make all of the evidence public. Can anyone guess why?

If the evidence stands, and I think it will because there was supporting evidence already at the time of the flight, it makes perfectly clear that the western Allies really were the "Bad Guys." Both Hitler and Hess should have received Nobel Peace Prizes. Hess proved with his own physical presence in Britain that Germany was absolutely sincere in its oft-repeated claims to wanting to end the war with Britain--and at no cost to Britain. Hitler's role in the peace offer is proved by the document Hess carried. For his Christ-like act, Hess was rewarded, not with a Nobel Peace Prize which he certainly deserved more than anyone else in human history--but with life imprisonment and finally his own murder in prison by a British agent.

So, after Hess' flight, what was left for Britain to fight Germany over? I think Britain and the US were possessed by racist insanity--driven by Jews--to destroy the German people once and for all. It was perfectly OK when God did it in the Old Testament to people the Hebrews wanted to destroy. The British and later American bombing and strafing of totally innocent German civilians served that same monstrous purpose perfectly.

The "Bad Guys" really were the Allies! The "Good Guys"were the Germans including the Nazis, and especially the SS.

The good news for the US and Britain is that there really is no God! Such a pity! If there were a God who resembled in any way the brutal arbiter of justice and punishment that Anglo-Americans pretend to believe in, he would have destroyed America and Britain thousands of times since the war.

A Nobel Peace prize? Really?
Well I guess if they gave one to Obama everyone then should get one.

Ok so Hess flies to Britain to attempt to broker a deal with the western powers so Hitler could have a free hand to attack the eastern powers.

thus causing directly or indirectly the deaths of over 40 million people deserves a peace prize? Even if not one Jew died, Hitler was still one of the world's most prolific mass murderers. See here for a summary of his and his followers other crimes

For the record I agree it shouldn't have been given to Obama. It was also absurd that the EU got the prize rather than, say, Julian Assange.

Adolf Hitler and National Socialist Germany saved Western Europe from being overrun by the Soviets hordes. The debt of gratitude we owe them can never be repaid in full.

Poland – This was a territorial dispute between Germany and Poland which could have been settled peacefully had Britain and America not been interfering behind the scenes.

In 1939 Poland was betrayed by Britain and France who left it to fight alone. At Yalta in 1945 Poland was once again betrayed by the Western Allies when Britain and America agreed to it becoming a Soviet colony―A fate it suffered for forty five years along with the rest of Eastern Europe. The British didn’t even allow the Free Polish Forces to march in the victory parade after the war for fear of offending the Soviets.

The following were all defensive operations to protect Germany from Allied aggression:

Charles Traynor wrote: Poland – This was a territorial dispute between Germany and Poland which could have been settled peacefully had Britain and America not been interfering behind the scenes.
In 1939 Poland was betrayed by Britain and France who left it to fight alone. At Yalta in 1945 Poland was once again betrayed by the Western Allies when Britain and America agreed to it becoming a Soviet colony―A fate it suffered for forty five years along with the rest of Eastern Europe. The British didn’t even allow the Free Polish Forces to march in the victory parade after the war for fear of offending the Soviets.
The following were all defensive operations to protect Germany from Allied aggression:
- The Netherlands
- Belgium
- Denmark
- Norway
- Yugoslavia
- Greece
- Soviet Union

Thankyou for writing so succintly what I also felt impelled to write in response to Cerdic's repeating of the unimpartial, ill-informed, clearly false, victor-conditioning.
It was Britain and France who imposed the unjust and inequitable punitive Treaty of Versailles.
It was Britain and France who refused diplomatic requests to rectify the unjust and inequitable punitive Treaty of Versailles.
It was Britain and France who first broke that treaty by NOT disarming themselves (Germany had, as agreed).
It was Britain and France who thwarted peaceful resolution of the East Prussion/German-Polish-corridor dispute.
It was Britain and France who declared war against Germany in 1939 as a result of that impasse and turned a local dispute into a world-wide war of incomparable carnage, destruction and devastation.
It was Britain who sought to invade Norway (Hitler got there first to thwart him).
And it was Britain who did invade Iran to control their oil.
So respecting the sovereignty of other countries was NOT something that any side felt was necessary if it stood in the way of their war aims.

To Cerdic:

It is more than a little coincidental that the image you are projecting of the good allies happens to conform to the narrative of the winning side and all of the films and comics which followed that, constituting the greater part of most people's comprehension of the second world war.

While Churchill was making stirring speeches about democracy and tyranny in Europe his response to an urgent request for food in Bengal was to ignore the request for food and inquire why Gandhi hadn't died yet. 2.5 million people died. Churchill refused to release food stored in Australia, refused to use ships for anything other than military transport, diverted shipping and supplies to the mediterranean. The British confiscated 50,000 boats in Bengal to delay a Japanese advance, conducted a scorched earth policy against the remaining crops and contuinued to export food out of India. Remarkably they refused an offer from the Japanese, mediated by the Indian National Army, to release food supplies from Burma to feed the needy population of Bengal. It did not suit British aims.

Etc., etc., etc.

"When people who are honestly mistaken learn the truth,
they either cease being mistaken
or they cease being honest"
-- Anonymous

Poland – This was a territorial dispute between Germany and Poland which could have been settled peacefully had Britain and America not been interfering behind the scenes

It could have been "settled peacefully" if Germany hadn't a) demanded the Polish land or League of Nations [under partial Polish sovereignty] land and b) aggressively invaded Poland and occupied the whole country and c) not left Poland very untrusting of any German promises after the Czechoslovakia affair.

You claim we "betrayed" Poland. As for 1939, it took a while to make a plan of attack, but the Germans took Poland so quickly we had no means to fight back. As for 1945, we had very little choice here. The Soviets were already occupying the whole of Eastern Europe and we couldn't afford another war after we were all worn out. These "betrayals" were unintentional, while the Germans' and Soviets' slaughter of 6 million Poles (perhaps more?)

But this is what I expect from apologists for German aggression. Germany had the right to use aggression (threatened or real) against any other country, and these countries HAD to trust everything Germany promised despite the dozens of treaties torn up.

Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Greece, Denmark - its true that these countries may have come under Allied occupation at some point if Germans hadn't invaded, but what is the concept of neutral countries for? Additionally, there is documentation that the Nazis were planning to invade these countries before any similar British plans emerged: See Nazi conspiracy and aggression.

Yugoslavia - Not aware of any Allied plans to invade this country.

I'm not even getting into the usual neo-Nazi claim that the Nazis saved Europe from the Soviets. I dont believe in Surovov's theory, and even if it is true, there is no way that the Soviets would have gotten anywhere. Look at Finland 1939/40.